R. P.
Gowerl
and I.P. Rhodes A Review of Techniques in the Lassaigne
Reading, Berkshire
England Sodium-Fusion
The sodium-fusion test forms an es-
sential part of most qualitative organic analyses since
it represents a rapid method for the detection of the
presence of various elcments in the substance tested.
The elements usually tested for are nitrogen, sulfur,
and the halogens-others being tested for usually only
if their presence is suspected from other evidence.
Since its original use by Lassaigne in 1843 (1, 2) and
subsequent modification by Jacobsen in 1879 (S), in
which sodium replaced potassium as the active reagent,
the test has altered very little, and basically is still in
use today.
However, despite the fact that in essence this is a
very simple tcst, and quantitative work has proved its
sensitivity (4), poor results are often obtained by
students a t the bench. This fairly general lack of
dexterity in using this test is also aggravated by the
fact that most t.exts on practical organic chemistry
present details of only two, or perhaps three, of the
possible techniques of applying this test, it usually being
true that under different circumstances different
techniques yield the best results. Thus, the present
article is intended to collect together the available
methods with some indication of the most suitable
circumstances in which each one may be best applied.
I t should be noted that although alternative methods
of detecting elements in organic compounds have been
developed, such as Middleton's test (5-7) and a recent
ignit,ion method using oxygen developed by D. C.
Ayres (a), these will not be dealt with in this article.
A review article dealing with the history and some uses
of t,he Lassaigne test entitled "A Lost Century, Las-
saigne's Test for Nitrogen" was published by Tucker
in 1943 (9).
Fusion of Sodium and Organic Compound
I n all the techniques to be described for fusing metal-
lic sodium with an organic compound, it is generally
best to commence with very gentle heating, a point
often not sufficiently stressed in the textbooks. After
any reaction has begun, the ignition tube should be re-
moved from the Bunsen flame until the reaction has al-
most ceased, vhen further heat may be applied. The
extent of heating should be gradually increased until
no further change appears to be taking place in the
ignit,ion tube. The tube should thcn be raised to red-
heat for a few moments to complete reaction and to
volatilize any unreacted organic material. The red-
hot tube is then plunged into a boiling-tube, beaker, or
evaporating basin containing water, care being taken
to shield the mouth of the vessel with a wire gauze.
Boiling of the water-extract is often advised in text-
books but appears unnecessary although the filtering of
'Present address: 23 Pon Close, Reading, Berkshire, England.
606 / Journol of Chemical Education
hot solutions is generally faster than for cold solutions.
Methods of Fusion
1) The most common method is to place the organic
sample and sodium a t the bottom of an ignition tube
and then to bring about reaction by gentle warming
(5, 6, 10-1 2 ) .
This technique has the advantage that it allows ob-
servation of whether the compound has "active-
hydrogen" since, if easily replaceable hydrogen is
present, direct reaction with sodium occurs in the cold.
The major disadvantage is that with very volatile
materials, the organic substance may very easily be
lost from the ignition tube before reaction with sodium
can occur.
This still remains the most usual technique used.
2) A simple modification of (1) in which the sample
and sodium are warmed in the ignition tube on a micro
burner only to the extent of allowing the organic ma-
terial to gently reflux within the tube.
When reaction begins the tube is removed from the
burner and the reaction is allowed to subside.
This method is applicable to volatile materials or
those which are rather inert. However, for volatile
materials very great care is required and other more
certain methods are available.
These methods will now be considered.
3) The organic sample and sodium are placed in the
bottom of an ignition tube and covered by anhydrous
sodium carbonate to approximately half-fill the tube.
More sodium is placed on top of the sodium carbonate
topped by a little more sodium carbonate. The con-
tents of the tube is tamped down and this is heated
over a macro-burner beginning at the top of the tube
and working down. I n this method, thc sodium
carbonate tends to hold the sample in contact with the
sodium long enough for reaction to occur. The sodium
half-way up the tube acts as a "scavenger" talung up
any vapors of unreacted sample that may permeate up
through the layer of sodium carbonate.
A variation of this method is to replace the sodium
carbonate by glass-wool (10).
4) The organic sample is placed a t the bottom of the
tube and a piece of sodium placed about a quarter of the
way from the top of the tube. The sodium is then
heated over a micro-burner until i t melts and the head
of molten sodium is allowed to roll down the inside wall
of the ignition tube onto the sample a t the bottom.
The heat contained in the molten sodium is generally
enough to cause reaction but if reaction does not occur,
the method (2) above may be applied to the contents
of the tube.
5) I n another method, the sample and sodium are
arranged in the ignition tube as in (4). The sodium is
then gently heated, with the tube held almost horizon-
tally, and the vapors from the sample are allowed to pass
over the piece of heated sodium (13).
6) A final method is to place the sodium only in the
bottom of the ignition-tube and then to gently heat it
until the sodium melts. Small quantities of organic
material are then added and heating continued after
cessation of any initial reaction (6, 7, 14).
The main advantage of this method is that a fairly
large quantity of sample can he added (it is easy to
estimate visually how much sodium remains) thus
giving a fairly high concentration of nitrogen, etc.,
if present, with subsequent ease of detection.
The main disadvantage of the method is that with
liquids cracking of the tube can occur.
Note. It appears that, particularly for highly
substituted nitro-compounds with a low carbon content,
better results are obtained by leaving a little liquid
paraffin or solvent naphtha (in which sodium is stored)
on the sodium and this supplies sufficientcarbon to form
a reasonable concentration of cyanide ions (15).
Notes on Testing for Nitrogen and Halogen
The test for sulfur with sodium nitroprusside is not
dealt with since this is a very sensitive test and seldom
leads to erroneous results-unless solutions become con-
taminated with sulfur in which case a positive result is
obtained when sulfur is in fact absent!
Test for Nitrogen
This usually involves boiling an alkaline sample of
the water-extract from the sodium fusion with ferrous
sulfate and then cooling and acidifying with dilute
sulfuric acid. The development of a blue coloration or
a dark blue precipitat,e is confirmatory for nitrogen.
It seems that the development of a blue coloration
and/or precipitate in a positive test depends on pH
and on temperature. With pH only just below 7, the
development of coloration is inhibited. It is, thus,
necessary to ensure the presence of an excess of acid.
Similarly, cooling of the solution is advisable because
development of the blue coloration appears to he in-
hibited in hot solutions.
Test for Halogen
This is straightforward if sulfur and nitrogen are
absent but even so should cause little difficulty when
either or both are present in solutions. I t must he
remembered that the solution should always be acidified
with nitric acid and if method (3) has been used, the
solution must he boiled with excess nitric acid to ensure
complete destruction of sodium carbonate.
The chief difficulty arises when cyanide or sulfide
ions are present and these are removed by boiling in
acid solut,ion. The problem is that the use of too
vigorous conditions also tends to remove any halide
ions present. Thus, to avoid loss of halide ions, acidifi-
cation should be with DILUTE nitric acid and the
solution boiled to approximately half its original
volume. The use of concentrated nitric acid should
be avoided.
Note. If a good result is obtained for nitrogen, this
indicates a thorough fusion and the presence of a high
concentration of cyanide ions. Thus, if halide ions are
also present i t may be expect,ed that a high concentra-
tion of halide ions will he present and with silver nitrate
a dense precipitate of silver halide will be obtained.
If only a faint halide test is obtained, removal of the
interfering ions should he repeated, first under milder
conditions (e.g., boiling for a shorter period of time or
use of wealcer acid) and then under stronger conditions
(e.g., boiling the solution to a smaller volume or use of
more concentrated acid). The results should indicate
whether the faint precipitate with silver nitrate re-
sulted from cyanide ionr, that had not been destroyed
or from halide ions.
Conclusions
This article is based on difficulties experienced by
the authors when using Lassaigne's test. The methods
described above have been tried and are generally found
to work under the circumstances indicated hut any
particular preference for certain methods is a matter
for each operator to decide for himself.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank Dr. I. L. Finar,
Senior Lecturer in Organic Chemistry at Northern
Polytechnic London, for advice and encouragement re-
ceived concerning this article.
Literature Cited
(1) LASSAIGNE, J. L., Annalm, 48, 367 (1843).
(2) LAXSAIGNE, J. L., C m p t . Rend. Hebdousadaires des Seances
de L'Acadamie des Science, 16, 387 (1843).
(3) JACOBSEN, 0.)Ber., 12, 2318 (1879).
(4) MULLIXEN, S. P., AND GABRIEL, G. L., Original eommuni-
cation-8th Intern. Congr. of Appl. Chem., 6, 208 (1912);
reference obtained from Chem. Abs. 6, 3094 (1912).
(5) HAYNES,B., "Qualitative Organic Analysis," MacMillan.
London, 1966.
(6j MANN,F. G., AND SAUNDERS, B. C., "P~acticalOrganic
Chemistrv." (3rd ed.). Lonemans. Green. London. 1952.
- -- ., .... .
(8) AYRES,D. C., J. CHEM.EDUC.,42,270 (1965).
(9) TUCKER,S. H., J. CHEM.EDUC.,22,212 (1043).
(10) CHERUNIS,N. D., AND ENTRIKIN,J. B., "Semimicro Qualita-
tive Organic Analysis," T. Y. Crowell, Co., New York,
.7=..
lo*"
R . P.,
(11) LINSTEAD, AND WEEDON, B. C. L., "Qualitative
Organic Chemical Analysis," Butterworth, London, 1956.
(12) OPENSHAW, N. T., "Laboratory Manual of Qualitative
Organic Analysis," Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge, England, 1955.
(13) B a n n ~ W.
, J., PhD, BSc, LRAM, Private Communication.
(14) FIESER,L. F., "Experiments in Organic Chemistry," D. C.
Healh and Co., New York, 1935.
(15) HUDSON, H. R., PhD, BSc, FRIC, Private communication.
Volume 46, Number 9, September 1969 / 607